This was really interesting: an article comparing the Battle of Austerlitz, in which Napoleon Bonaparte defeated a superior Austrian/Russian force in 1805, and John Kerry's campaign. Not being an historian*, I can't vouch for the author's conclusions, but it was an enjoyable read.

Found it at Townhall.com. Here's the link.

And here's an excerpt:

On the eve of the Battle Austerlitz, Napoleon knew that he was badly outnumbered and even more badly outgunned. He had been unable to destroy the Austrian army before it linked up with a huge Russian force. Now, from atop the Pratzen Heights near the town of Austerlitz, the enemy generals looked down upon the bedraggled, exhausted French with contempt, confident that the next day would bring victory. They convened a grand council of war to discuss the broad outlines of their attack. The meeting resembled nothing so much as a dinner-party, and until three o' clock in the morning, the generals debated.

Meanwhile, in Napoleon's campaign tent, there was no debate. The newly-crowned Emperor of France was on his hands and knees on a huge map of the battlefield, quietly shifting small-unit figurines back and forth, devising the trap that was to become the historical masterpiece of his career. As night fell, 193 tactical movement orders issued from Napoleon's headquarters. When the Austrians and Russians awoke the next morning, they thought they were looking at the same battlefield. But unbeknownst to them, the battlefield had become Napoleon's deadly spider web.

Kerry has taken a key page out of the Austro-Russian playbook. According to Democratic strategists, the Kerry campaign has been paralyzed for weeks by a high-level debate over the candidate's message. Even now, at three o' clock in the morning on the day of the battle, they are still debating their strategy. And if that were not bad enough, Kerry recently enlarged the dinner-party by brining several Clinton operatives on board—opinionated and forceful debaters all. The Democrat has had great difficulty coming up with any strategy, and has reacted only by compounding the problem.

*Annoying grammatical note: if we can put a man on the moon, why can't we stop using "an" instead of "a" in front of a noun that starts with "h," which is so obviously a consonant?